Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MrShoop
What is says is that if you have a candidate who can actually win in a very liberal state, even if is he a squishy RINO, it is better than having a liberal democrat instead.

Then why did moderate Mitt Romney get the same percentage of the vote (40%) in Delaware as Christine O'Donnell got in Delaware (40%) for US Senate?

Mike Castle's last opponent spent only $26,000 yet Castle got only 61% of the vote. When you get only 61% against an opponent spending only $26,000 for a Congressional seat, Mike Castle was a dead man walking, politicall. Mike Castle would have been down in Jan Ting territory. Castle would have lost by a WORSE margin than O'Donnell. For one thing, Castle could not have raised any serious money for the campaign.
11 posted on 11/06/2012 8:08:40 PM PST by Moseley (http://www.curesocialism.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Moseley

“yet Castle got only 61% of the vote”

61% is a win in my book.

Between the 3 losses in 2010 and the losses in 2012 we could have won, the GOP Senate selection process has managed to entitle Harry Reid as majority leader (indeed we could have knocked him off as Senator with better candidates).


14 posted on 11/06/2012 8:30:13 PM PST by WOSG (REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMA. He stole AmericaÂ’s promise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson